Allowed

Sahil v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC9 Oct 2023BAIL/42698/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court allowed bail to applicant Sahil under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in a theft case, noting he was not named in the FIR, recovery lacked independent witnesses, and prior criminal history was absent, while he had been in custody over two months.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail upon furnishing personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions against tampering with evidence or pressuring witnesses and appearing on all dates.

Sahil Vs State of U.P. — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:193561

¶2

Court No. - 74

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 42698 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Sahil Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Yogendra Pal Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶6

Heard counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State.

¶7

The instant bail application, under Section 439 Cr.P.C., has been filed with a prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 208 of 2023, under Sections 379 & 411 I.P.C. and Section 150 of Railway Act, Police Station- Jani, District- Meerut during pendency of the trial.

¶8

Counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant was not named in the first information report and has been falsely implicated in the instant case. False recovery of 162 railway fasteners/ iron rings and 42 iron plates has been shown from the joint possession of the applicant and another co-accused. There is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. Prior to the instant case the applicant does not have any criminal history, however after his arrest he has been implicated in other cases. The applicant is in jail since 03.08.2023. In case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid facts from the record.

¶10

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record this Court prima facie finds that the applicant was not named in the first information report. There is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. Further, the applicant has remained confined for more than two months and after submission of the charge-sheet there is no hope of early conclusion of trial, more so when no reasonable apprehension has been brought to the fore by the State that the applicant, if enlarged on bail, would either tamper with the evidence or delay the trial or intimidate the witness, without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶11

Let the applicant, Sahil involved in the aforesaid case be

¶12

released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned on the following conditions that:

¶13

i. the applicant shall not temper with the prosecution evidence;

¶14

ii. the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witness; and,

¶15

iii. the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court.

¶16

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

¶17

Order Date :- 9.10.2023 Sachin Mishra

¶18

Digitally signed by :- SACHIN MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sahil v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sahil v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Amrit Singh Vs State of U.P. and 6 Others

Mahendra Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Bijendra Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Dharmraj Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Dilawar Vs State of U.P.

Mohd. Jeeshan Vs State of U.P.